State commission supports public aid for protesting county commissioner

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

Please enable Javascript to watch this video

SALT LAKE CITY -- The Utah Commission on the Stewardship of Public Lands decided that the federal case against a San Juan County Commissioner is exhibit 'A' in their argument against federal control of public lands in Utah.

"These are fundamental issues that are at the core of the constitution," said State Sen. Scott Jenkins of Weber County, as he voted for a motion supporting Phil Lyman, the San Juan County Commissioner who led a protest ride through Recapture Canyon, an area near Blanding declared off-limits to motorized vehicles because of the presence of sensitive native artifacts.

Lyman was convicted of a federal misdemeanor charge in May and faces a sentencing hearing in July.

The move to give Lyman state support was spearheaded by Rep. Mike Noel of Kanab, who outlined the history of official recognition of the road through Recapture Canyon. Noel considers Lyman's conviction an injustice.

"It will have a chilling effect on other county commissioners, sheriffs, elected officials, legislators to exercise their duty to protect the health safety and welfare of the cities in their jurisdiction," Noel said.

The Commission's two Democrats opposed Noel's move, saying civil disobedience like Lyman's can be admirable, but it always comes with personal risk.

"You want to protest? Fine. Do the time!" said Sen. Jim Dabakis of Salt Lake City.

In the end, the committee voted along party lines to support a motion asking the state's Constitutional Defense Council to consider providing Lyman with financial support.

When asked the potential cost, Noel said it would be "no more than$100,000."

Troll_herd

bob

It’s called Civil Disobedience. The hippies said that we have a moral obligation to violate unjust, illegal “laws.”

I agree with them. Constitutional conservatives are the true LIBERALS. Today, just as they were 230 years ago.

The Federal government has no right to the land within any State except under certain strict exceptions spelled out in the Constitution. The BLM has no legitimate legal authority over the land. We the People are entirely within our rights to ignore their edicts. They are nothing more than squatters.

auijuii

before I saw the receipt that said $6276 , I did not believe …that…my mother in law was like trully making money part-my best friend’s mom makes $75 hourly on the internet . She has been out of a job for 5 months but last month her payment was $16123 just working on the internet for a few hours. why not try this ou Generate Cash Now

bob

joe schmoe

bob

I’ve challenged many a liberal to show me where the Constitution authorizes the Federal government to own the physical land itself within any State.

No takers so far.

However, I can easily show them the EXCEPTIONS allowed in the Constitution for military reserves and a national capitol. (If the Constitution specifically spells out the exceptions, then why do liberals think exceptions are necessary?)

And, when they fail, I can point them toward the 10th Amendment of the Bill of Rights, which states very clearly and in easily understood English that the Federal government has no authority or rights that are not specifically granted to it by the Constitution.